Anthropic: ‘human error, not a security breach’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpkyF-ugVq4&list=UU9rJrMVgcXTfa8xuMnbhAEA - video
https://pivottoai.libsyn.com/20260401-claude-code-codebase-leaked - podcast
time: 8 min 19 sec
Anthropic: ‘human error, not a security breach’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpkyF-ugVq4&list=UU9rJrMVgcXTfa8xuMnbhAEA - video
https://pivottoai.libsyn.com/20260401-claude-code-codebase-leaked - podcast
time: 8 min 19 sec
By far the dumbest “feature” in the codebase is this thing called “Buddy” (described in a few places such as here). Honestly, I don’t really know what it’s for or what the point is.
Great, so they were planning on a gacha system where you can get an ASCII virtual pet that, uhh, occasionally makes comments? Truly a serious feature for a serious tool for the serious discipline of software engineering. Imagine if IntelliJ decided to pull this bullshit.
The Onion could not have come up with a better way to illustrate this very point.
You just gotta appreciate that the most deterministic part of the code base is the predatory lootbox system.
The terms of use of anthropic (in Europe) explicitly call out non commercial use only on their pro plan.
So by their own admissions, it’s not a serious tool for the serious discipline of software engineering. It’s reserved for vibe coding only
Even before this, I felt strongly that there was a big element of gambling in coding agents.
“Please fix this bug!”
<pulls lever>
“Big bucks, no wammies!”